The Indian rice export ban, the war in Ukraine and El Niño are combining to create a “doom loop” for the world’s poorest people, as staple food prices soar.

    • LemmyLefty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      88
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Referring to the potential starvation deaths of a large group of people as a positive for climate change is like saying you’re glad someone died early from a car accident instead of suicide.

          • BaconIsAVeg@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            18
            ·
            1 year ago

            This bot needs to die, or at least be upfront about what it is. I’m fine with piracy, but don’t dress it up as “privacy respecting open source”. If you don’t agree with Youtube’s model, then just don’t use it.

              • BaconIsAVeg@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Look, I love using pipe-viewer, but I’m not childish enough to think it isn’t piracy. But I guess whatever you feel your entitled to…

      • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        36
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, but im just a very positive thinker today!

        (is irony dead? Does everything need the /s? Are people so insane they think someone would writing that in a serious note…)

        • LemmyLefty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          45
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Honestly? Yeah, I thought you were serious, because I’ve seen that attitude expressed before. Generally it’s more “this hazy, unspecified population can be sacrificed to help me deal with the existential dread that me and my world are walking off a cliff” than “dear me I so DO delight in death”, but it makes my teeth ache.

          Thank you for clarifying, and I’m sorry for jumping on you.

          • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            20
            ·
            1 year ago

            For real? (serious) a nuclear war might be beneficial because mostly citys of big polluters will be taken out, starvation always hits those that already basically don’t pollute. So that argument would make 0 sense regardless…

            And i don’t think a nuclear war is exactly what we want… There are better ways than to suicide on species level…

        • 133arc585@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          From the rest of your comment history? Yes, it’s entirely believable. It’s more surprising that you’re walking it back, really.

        • darthelmet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Eh, the way it was written I wouldn’t have read it as sarcasm. Text and tone yada yada. That said, I’ve definitely seen people who seriously think like this.

          • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            20
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            For real? (serious) a nuclear war might be beneficial because mostly citys of big polluters will be taken out, starvation always hits those that already basically don’t pollute. So that argument would make 0 sense regardless…

            And i don’t think a nuclear war is exactly what we want… There are better ways than to suicide on species level…

            Edit to clarify that im not in favor of nuclear war…

            • Drusas@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s called Malthusianism (after the philosopher Malthus) and, yes, it is a real philosophy.

                • Drusas@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Sort of. Malthusians believe that disasters which take out large numbers of people help to keep the population in check and are therefore necessary. Obviously a little oversimplified, but that’s about what it boils down to.

                  • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Sounds somewhat reasonable and nuts at the same time.

                    Like some sad people that lost people in a Desaster saying it was for the greater good when in reality its ultimately meaningless.

          • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            15
            ·
            1 year ago

            My entire existence is basically a joke so don’t take me too serious.

            In general its a better approach to think everything on the internet is satire until clarified that its not, way better for your believe in humanity, trust me.

            • ToastedRavioli@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              I see a lot of people on the internet say some pretty horrible shit with a lot of conviction. Sorry that you’re having a rough time. Hopefully adding more clarity to your communication helps a bit.

      • Aux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, once they cannot afford the food they stop making any CO2.

        • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not sure if you caught the text of what they’re saying: people who can’t afford to eat rice starving to death aren’t removing much of humanity’s carbon footprint.

            • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              1 year ago

              Where you suggest twice that nuclear war would be good or that your whole life is a joke?

              I feel fucked up ways about stuff too. Nothing wrong with it and all that negativity’s gotta go somewhere. Just wanted to head the ecofascism train off at the pass.

              • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                I literally clarified that while it would help against climate change its not something that is a good option at all and that im against it…

                Its a Example of some fucked up view that would at least make sense on a technical level, unlike making food prices higher and killing those that already don’t pollute like at all…

                • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It doesn’t make sense even on a technical level. Cities are all near water and their fallout plumes would irradiate huge swaths of the earth to the east in addition to everything downstream.

                  The infrastructure of civilization is all clustered around cities as well, so we’d lose access to the best spots to live.

                  I got nothing but sympathy for you, thirty years ago that bit would have killed. Today everyone assumes you’re serious.

                  • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    No humans = No worries about climate change…

                    So it does work. The point is that its absolutely not a Reasonable option at all.

                    Also nukes aren’t dirty bombs, they don’t do that much radiation, most of the nuclear material gets turned into pure fusion energy. So they are kinda environmentally friendly in a way…

    • Spzi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s culling the wrong demographic. Removing poor people is the least efficient. Removing the poorest will have the least effect possible.

      These comments always make me wonder wether it’s a lack of education, bad taste or racism.

      • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Can people like you maybe read a little further down the thread, like i literally explained in detail why that comment is completely ridiculous and i don’t understand how someone could take it as a serious comment.

        Its literally a joke.

        • Spzi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, I read it before. No, it didn’t change much. Where’s the joke, what’s funny about this?

          On the other hand, too many people write these comments seriously, which is enough reason to counter them.

          It’s downplaying the climate crisis and normalizing racism. You can insist it was done in a lighthearted way, but that’s not so relevant.

        • Spzi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Except the people who prefer to pay less for their goods and services. They depend on people willing / forced to work for very little; they need the poor.

          Also this is not a business where you could hire and fire people based on what is ‘needed’, and you’re not the boss.

          These are humans with exactly the same right to food as you.